Solid State Laser News

kagemusha said:

The article says this project is titled "solid state high power laser weapon system demonstrator". This suggests it is not based on fiber lasers and since General Atomics is not mentioned I would guess it will use the Northrop JHPSSL device. The power rating is in the JHPSSL range:

"While the LaWS weapon is as powerful as 15 to 50 kilowatts, the LWSD program seeks to increase shipboard laser weapons power to 100 to 150 kilowatts using existing ship power and cooling"

Northrop now has all the internal capacity to build almost the entire system: optics, beam control, wavefront correction, and laser. I seem to recall Boeing had earlier won a Navy contract for a beam control system based on its' HEL MD work so it is likely this will be a multi company program.

Northrop also has a JHPSSL device installed at the old THEL site at WSMR (solid state laser testbed experiment). It would be nice to see some status report on how it has been performing.
 
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/12/ac-130-to-get-laser-guns-air-launched-drones-heithold/
 
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/12/05/northrop-grumman-invents-a-laser-tank.aspx
 
So CNN shows it is almost as informed as anyone reading this thread.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/12/15/us-air-force-lasers-fighter-jets-orig-vstop.cnn/video/playlists/cant-miss/
 
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/12/general-atomics-plans-150kw-laser-tests-eye-on-ac-130-avenger/
 
http://maritime-executive.com/article/navy-invests-in-powerful-laser-weapons-system
 
LAWS-laser-aboard-Dewey.jpg

ORIGINAL CAPTION: As seen in this still image taken from video, the Laser Weapon System (LaWS), temporarily installed aboard the guided-missile destroyer USS Dewey (DDG 105) in 2012, is a technology demonstrator built by the Naval Sea Systems Command from commercial fiber solid state lasers, utilizing combination methods developed at the Naval Research Laboratory. LaWS can be directed onto targets from the radar track obtained from a MK 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapon system or other targeting source. The Office of Naval Research’s Solid State Laser (SSL) portfolio includes LaWS development and upgrades providing a quick reaction capability for the fleet with an affordable SSL weapon prototype. U.S. Navy photo

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/lasers-belong-at-sea/

Something of a puff piece, but it does summarize some of the recent developments.​
 
Hope we are still talking.

hybrid solid-state/gas-phase laser systems focused on diode-pumped alkali vapor lasers (DPALs)

http://spie.org/newsroom/technical-articles/4562-hybrid-lasers-for-directed-energy-applications
 
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2063
 
MDA charts $1.3B course to new UAV-borne, missile-killing laser 'before 2020'

January 27, 2016

The Pentagon believes recent breakthroughs in directed-energy technology may augur well for a new speed-of-light missile defense program before the end of the decade, a potential game-changing capability that could arm unmanned aerial vehicles with compact lasers powerful enough to destroy enemy ballistic missiles early in flight.

On Jan. 19, Missile Defense Agency director Vice Adm. James Syring touted the Defense Department's new plan to resurrect the idea of a flying laser to knock down ballistic missiles during the boost-phase of flight -- the same objective of the Airborne Laser program, a $5 billion gambit begun in 1996 but terminated in 2009 due to affordability and technology concerns.

"We have significantly ramped up our program in terms of investment and talking about what else needs to be done to mature this capability," Syring said at a Jan. 19 address at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He elaborated on steps the agency last year promised Congress "will prove the [directed-energy] technology is ready to execute missile defense missions before 2020."

Last February, MDA sent Congress a $50 million FY-16 research and development spending request for directed-energy projects, including $30.2 million to fund continued laboratory work on two different laser technologies and $19.8 million to fund the design of a UAV-borne, low-power laser demonstrator. While MDA budget documents forecast spending of more than $500 million on these two directed-energy projects between FY-16 and FY-20, Syring told Congress last year that when classified funding was factored in, the agency's planned spending on directed energy research was actually much larger.

"We are requesting over $1.3 billion -- both unclassified and classified -- funding which is a several-hundred-million-dollar increase over last year's budget," the three-star admiral told the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee on March 19 in response to being asked how much money was needed to advance directed energy research "at the most rapid pace possible." Syring added the $1.3 billion allocation "is right in terms of the balance of those resources," according to a subcommittee transcript of the hearing.

In the end, however, House and Senate appropriators granted MDA $26 million in FY-16 for continued research on the lasers -- a $4.2 million cut -- and denied all funding for the UAV-borne laser prototype request. Still, Syring during his CSIS address this month outlined MDA plans to continue working on directed energy in preparation for an FY-19 decision on whether the technology will be mature enough to proceed with a bona fide acquisition program for a UAV-borne, ballistic-missile-killing laser.

Lasers hold the potential to provide the U.S. military with a new way to track and destroy enemy ballistic missiles at much lower cost than the currently deployed fleet of land- and sea-based guided missile interceptors that strive to shoot down targets in either the mid- or terminal-phase of flight.

MDA's FY-16 budget documents indicate plans to collaborate with the Air Force, which is eyeing high-powered lasers for its next-generation fighter aircraft development project, as well as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

The CSIS event was sponsored by Boeing, which is pitching a UAV to carry a notional missile defense laser and was also prime contractor for the ABL program.

"It proved that this concept could work," Syring said on Jan. 19, referring to a brief video of a February 2010 ABL flight test that purported to show the heavily modified commercial 747 -- armed with a high-energy laser -- destroying a short-range ballistic missile target. "It proved that given enough power, given enough beam quality, given enough altitude, intercept of a ballistic missile . . . would be theoretically possible."

While the Navy three-star proceeded to underscore the complexity and challenges of fielding such a weapon during his remarks at the Washington think tank -- there are "many, many, many challenges here to get to boost-phase [intercept]," he said -- MDA in documents sent to Congress is clearly bullish on the potential for directed energy.

"The experience we gained from that successful first foray into directed-energy weapons [ABL] is pointing us along a new path that integrates a highly efficient, compact electric laser into a high-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle capable of flying in the stratosphere above the clouds which diffuse the laser energy," FY-16 budget documents MDA sent to Congress in February 2015 state. "Flying at low speed in the relatively calm air at 60,000 feet significantly reduces the complex beam pointing and atmospheric jitter compensation systems that were so troublesome on the ABL."

With lessons gleaned from the ABL program "and breakthrough research at our nation's premier scientific laboratories," MDA is "implementing an incremental roadmap that will prove the technology is ready to execute missile defense missions before 2020," the agency told Congress last year.

Since the ABL program was terminated, MDA has funded continued development of two high-energy laser technologies, the Diode Pumped Alkali Laser System (DPALS) with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, CA; and Fiber Combining Lasers (FCS) with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Lincoln Laboratory. According to MDA, both of these technologies show "considerable promise."

To date, work on these efforts has yielded lasers that pack more power in smaller containers than ABL's directed-energy beam -- which provided 55 kilograms per kilowatt, according to Syring.

In the laboratory, Lawrence Livermore's DPALS has demonstrated a power density of 35 kilograms per kilowatt; and Lincoln Laboratories has demonstrated 40 kilograms per kilowatt, according to the admiral. Syring said these lasers must be much more efficient in order to destroy ballistic missiles while riding on a UAV.

"Where we need to be is at 5 kilograms per kilowatt or lower to have any chance of fielding it on a high-altitude platform that can be sustained for several days or several weeks," Syring told the CSIS audience. "How do you scale the fiber amplifiers down, how do you scale the technology down into a package that could be fielded?"

MDA is funding $26 million worth of research in FY-16 that aims to answer that very question.

"These key investments are targeted at driving the weigh per kW [kilowatt] of power in the fiber amplifier from a 5 kg [kilogram] per kW to 1kg per kW," according to the budget documents.

Specifically, MDA expects Lincoln Laboratories in FY-16 to complete critical design review and "begin fabrication and integration of the 5 kilograms per kW low size weight and power Fiber Combining Laser System," according to MDA's budget request. This work aims in part to build on a "successful" FCL 34-kilowatt demonstration, according to the budget request.

Lawrence Livermore, meanwhile, is to demonstrate a DPALS at 30 kilowatts average power, an upgrade from a 10-kilowatt system first light, according to MDA's budget request; the lab is also to begin design for a 120 kW DPALS "gain cell and pump delivery system."

In addition to the two laboratories, MDA noted in its FY-16 budget request that "Multiple industry partners continue to make steady progress in high power lasers."

"The MDA will select the best available high-energy laser technology from the national laboratories and/or industry for a follow-on prototype high-power laser demonstration in FY-19 with a [critical design review] in FY-20," the budget justification document states.

Citing "significant affordability and technology problems," then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates canceled a second planned Airborne Laser prototype aircraft on April 6, 2009, and transferred the lone ABL aircraft from MDA to the office of the director of defense research and engineering, to be used for research and development and renamed it the Airborne Laser Test Bed (ALTB).

The decision to wind down the program was also prompted by concerns about how to effectively employ the weapon system. The "operational concept of the Airborne Laser would have required that the aircraft orbit -- let's say the target was Iran -- would have required an orbit almost entirely within the borders of Iran," Gates told a House panel on May 13, 2009. "This is probably a little problematic."

The highly modified Boeing 747 now sits inactive in the Arizona desert, stripped of its critical high-energy components. -- Jason Sherman
 
"We are requesting over $1.3 billion -- both unclassified and classified -- funding which is a several-hundred-million-dollar increase over last year's budget," the three-star admiral told the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee on March 19 in response to being asked how much money was needed to advance directed energy research "at the most rapid pace possible." Syring added the $1.3 billion allocation "is right in terms of the balance of those resources," according to a subcommittee transcript of the hearing.


I wonder who “we” is? If he is speaking as head of MDA then this would be HEL research geared towards BMD applications. I wasn’t aware MDA had a black budget in any event. The various solid state HEL projects being developed for Army/Navy/Air Force applications should be budgeted elsewhere. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if the $1.3B actually represents the combined DOD HEL budget for all services and it sounds too high based on the volume of work/activity that is apparent in industry. Maybe they are including high power microwave directed energy in that total.
 
"We" is the MDA, and I wouldn't describe this as a "black" program.
 
My point is precisely that MDA is not a black program. Its' budget is public and I was wondering if there is a component of the MDA budget that is hidden. Politically, my guess is that MDA funding is made public due to the nature of its' mission. The statement by Admiral Syring indicating classified projects makes me suspect he talking about DOD wide funding.
 
fredymac said:
My point is precisely that MDA is not a black program. Its' budget is public and I was wondering if there is a component of the MDA budget that is hidden. Politically, my guess is that MDA funding is made public due to the nature of its' mission. The statement by Admiral Syring indicating classified projects makes me suspect he talking about DOD wide funding.
Doesn't the armed services declare budget numbers but 'classified programs' remain hidden. The black budget watchers go through service budgets and add up programs with a dollar amount but code word protected like "Caulk Circle" or "Have Origins" (I made those up but have a whole book filled with these) and try and determine what might be getting worked on.
 
The HEL community isn't big. A $Billion dollar program would attract notice due to hiring activity. I also don't believe MDA would be allowed to have a black project because of the political repercussions. The dollar amounts indicated for Lawrence Labs and Lincoln Labs are more reflective of the spending going on. My speculative guess would be a black HPM missile project.
 
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/2016/02/11/mda-request-preserves-priorities-targets-laser-tech-development/80222574/
 
Germany is still funding some HEL activity. I wonder if they have a roadmap plan indicating where they want to go with this?

http://www.dmitryshulgin.com/author/wagner666/
 

Attachments

  • Rheinmetall Laser At Sea.jpg
    Rheinmetall Laser At Sea.jpg
    41.9 KB · Views: 87
fredymac said:
Germany is still funding some HEL activity. I wonder if they have a roadmap plan indicating where they want to go with this?

http://www.dmitryshulgin.com/author/wagner666/

Wow thank you for posting.
"mighty mighty" and the folks in the vid like what they're seenin
 
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/02/24/lasers-military-research-hopes-reality/80869064/
 
Future Tech

—Jennifer Hlad

2/25/2016

​The Air Force is already flying with lasers on its large aircraft every day, but the goal is to learn from experience to get larger power outputs and better thermal managements to be able to transition to other aircraft, and eventually to have an offensive laser capability, the deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for science, technology, and engineering told Congress on Wednesday. “I think we are on a good path,” said David Walker during a House Armed Services Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities hearing. Walker said the Air Force’s proposed budget for science and technology is $2.5 billion for Fiscal 2017, up 4.5 percent from Fiscal 2016. The service is emphasizing research in hypersonics and low-cost cruise missile technologies for contested environments, and is currently doing pilot experimentation campaigns addressing future concepts for close air support, operationalizing directed energy, reducing time to move from data to decisions, and defeating agile and intelligent targets, Walker said. Looking ahead 20 years, Walker said he sees a lot of promise in “the science of the very small,” and anticipates being able to build materials then that we can’t even conceive of now.
 
bobbymike said:
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/02/24/lasers-military-research-hopes-reality/80869064/

Someone should tell them we were actually shooting down missiles back in the 80s but the lasers were the size of a building or required a large plane just to lift the system into the air. Show them the advancements in system size reduction, power density, etc. It's not as though things have been standing still the last 35 years.
 
SHIELD - Self protected High Energy Laser Demonstrator

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-air-force-arm-jets-superpowered-shield-lasers-15367
 
FEL's being discussed again?

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/files/asne_paper_a_vision_for_de_weapons.pdf
 
That's an older paper, pre-2010.

The Navy never stopped looking at FEL, they just had to balance resources away from it for budgetary reasons. Could be worse, Polywell had its funding zeroed out.
 
Found an old video focusing on THEL but also including some short clips from earlier projects. The image at 9 seconds is an HEL beam hitting a big chunk of plexiglass. The THEL was a chemical DF (Deuterium Fluoride) laser emitting at 3.8 microns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpuU-BEadxI
 
Apparently General Dynamics and Boeing got together to put the man portable HEL into a Stryker and are pitching it as an anti UAS capability for the Army. It's interesting to hear that the rationale is to avoid introducing a different vehicle into the Army rather than using the HELMD truck. A test will be conducted in April to determine effectiveness but mainly as a demonstration for the Army so they can decide whether to fund further development of a higher power system. The Marines GBAD system may be a competitor in philosophy to this effort.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww-nAv63PaQ
 
The Air Force Research Lab keeps re-organizing and changing their name. Same thing happens with big companies in the way they keep re-organizing their business units and renaming them. I guess it's how the senior leadership justify their pay. Several years ago the directed energy section within AFRL was designated AFRL/DE. They set up a Youtube channel and posted a number of videos but it has been defunct for a while now. The decision on how tightly research activities are kept under wraps is probably one of those executive decisions as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV6-oV2CfZs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbY6YSsiUSk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d70OOGgLOC4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bgbXPmJqbo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VdbGpXtMt0
 
fredymac said:
The Air Force Research Lab keeps re-organizing and changing their name. Same thing happens with big companies in the way they keep re-organizing their business units and renaming them. I guess it's how the senior leadership justify their pay.

Seriously?
 
AFRL stays AFRL. Below that the directorates keep getting new names. DE is now RD. Same thing goes for all the other directorates. Before that, lab organizations were shuffled around and renamed. There used to be Avionics Lab, Propulsion Lab, Wright Aeronautical Labs, Materials Lab, etc. The overall organization grouped all R&D into Systems Command which held all the labs and system SPOs. AFMC is now the parent structure and includes what used to be a totally separate Logistics Command. How this improves anything is a guess. As far as commercial businesses, I've lost track how many times Boeing reorganized its military side. It almost seems to be fad based and it occurs when you see a re-shuffle in the senior management. Again, as far as any real world benefits, it is like "Total Quality Management" and 6 Sigma, and all the other fad management BS I saw come and go over the years. At best it changed nothing and usually incurred wasted time and paperwork.
 
"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganized. Presumably the plans for our employment were being changed. I was to learn later in life that, perhaps because we are so good at organizing, we tend as a nation to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."

Charlton Ogburn Jr., “Merrill’s Marauders", Harpers Magazine, January 1957
 
fredymac said:
6 Sigma, and all the other fad management BS I saw come and go over the years. At best it changed nothing and usually incurred wasted time and paperwork.

So you think 6 Sigma is bullshit. I think we're done here.
 
"So you think 6 Sigma is bullshit. I think we're done here."

Statistical process control reduced to a cult while losing touch to the underlying principles of what you are trying to do. Hewlett Packard was the poster boy of 6 Sigma. I know people who worked there. Lots of interesting stories but not of triumph and prosperity.

6 Sigma as tool might be OK. Beyond that, no.
 
sublight is back said:
fredymac said:
6 Sigma, and all the other fad management BS I saw come and go over the years. At best it changed nothing and usually incurred wasted time and paperwork.

So you think 6 Sigma is bullshit. I think we're done here.

6 Sigma isn't "bullshit" but having gone through TQM back in the 80s, I kept expecting to see something miraculously new when the suits started praising 6 Sigma, and implementing it. I didn't see anything that rocked my world. To quote one guy, "shiiit Batman had his gear 5 Sed back in the 60s."
 
A dated but interesting video looking at projects developed at Kirtland AFB (AFRL directed energy directorate). The mirror seen at the 5 minute mark is a membrane mirror and is being driven from convex to concave shape by simple air pressure. This is not the holographic technology developed at Ball Aerospace but an alternative that tries to create the correct surface geometries by pressure and possibly electrical forces. The "relay mirror" telescope posted earlier in this thread is shown around the 6 minute mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSGprwJx_zs&list=PL15F09BE877EF1FFC
 
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-us-air-forces-next-super-weapon-lethal-lasers-16047
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom